I wasnt finding a key to LiaHonas's room so Im still not knowing if shes got those bad books in my home. Pratt says he'll take a look the next time he's with her, so thats OK.
I was thinking Harmonee cant be complaining about polygamy cus she went into it with Pratt and shes been living it for years so she cant be blaming anybody. Pratt says one of the things shes not likeing is cus the wives dont get to say who there husbands are marrying and she never wanted me in the family. Thats real MEAN, andt its not up to HER who Pratts marrying!!! LaBlessing said she heard Harmonee saying polygamys "like a box of choclates - you never know what your getting!" Thats real dumb - gals cant be thinking that there husbandsre not gonna be marrying somebody, just cus THEY dont like them. Course, the guys ARE asking there wives about it when there wanting a new wife, but if there wivesre saying no, then they just go ahead anyways. They cant NOT be doing the right thing on account of the wives they already got. Thats what its saying in the Doctrine and Covenenants secsion 132
"64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
"65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife."
So, theirs not to many wives saying no, when there husbands take new wives, cus thats real bad! (Whose wanting god to be destroying them, for saying no????) Some of them carry on about it after the marriage sometimes - I saw a gal once who put her vail over her face and cried and cried after her husband got married - right there at the alter!! Its not good to be making a fuss like that cus it makes you look real bad. (I think she was probally one of those first wives - their always the worse ones) Most galsre not saying or doing anything.
I was the last wife both times I got married, but Id NEVER be making a fuss about it! If Pratts getting another wife it wont worry me at all!
A coupla gentile gals were writing letters and saying it OK for gals to be having bunchesve husbands, but Pratt says it wrong, cus its not in the scriptures and it wont be making heapsve babies like it should. And he says there might be a coupla animals like swans sticking with just one, but mostly the guy animals are getting around a lot makeing as many babies as they can, and thats what gods wanting for us!
Pratt might be meeting with Harmonee today and he wants me to be there, so Ill tell you about it tomorrow, if we do.
Happy sabbath!
Blessings!
HoneyDawn
Killing cats and dogs
1 year ago
16 comments:
Honey Dawn,
Thank you very much for raising my concern about why intelligent women support polygamy with Pratt the other day. Here is the link to Sarah Leavitt's journal, in case any of your readers are interested:
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/SLeavitt.html
Sarah Leavitt was a person who thought and spoke in ecstatic terms, and was really primed for Mormonism, in the time period that just preceded Joseph Smith's revelation. So when he came along, she became an early Saint.
Also, as an aside, I was not really interested in what Pratt had to say about it, since his point of view is well worn territory, and fairly predictable. I'm interested to know what's in it for women.
I'm not sure what I would be if I had been brought up reading some of the religious edicts that you posted .
Honey Dawn,
You just tell Pratt that there are a lot of female animals in nature which mate with multiple different male animals. It is not just the male animals who have many different female mates.
This "polygyny only" stuff is nonsense.
Keeping Sweet
I've got to say that you have a point about multiple wives being more practical than multiple husbands, simply because traditionally if a woman had more than one husband then parentage of a child could never be properly determined.
DNA can sort that out now, but I would guess that is why in the past polyandry was never as widespread as polygany, and in cultures where it did arise it often involved brothers.
Also, I have read 'In Sacred Loneliness' and it is hardly a ringing endorsement for polygamy. I suspect Harmonee is questioning the legitimacy of polygamy, which must be very confronting for her as she is not Pratts first wife. Did you say once that she was his legal wife though? I do think it's mean of her to pick out one wife as the target for her dissatisfaction with the system though.
Melissa xx
Sharks, reptiles, and birds reproduce by parthenogenesis, so masturbation is ok. What else do you guys want to rationalize?
WC, Parthenogenesis is extremely rare in vertebrates, does not occur in nature in mammalian organisms, and when parthenogenesis does occur, it does not involve the practice of masturbation, so your comment is a non - sequitor.
Since you think one man having multiple wives is ok, surely you don't see a problem with women having multiple husbands, known as the practice of polyandry. It is an ancient practice in parts of India where Hinduism is practiced. Multiple husbands work to support a woman and their children. This enables a woman to devote all her energies to child raising. It also controls population growth, so it would be favorable in today's society.
Why the double standard, WC? Why is it only correct for a man to have multiple wives, but a woman cannot have multiple partners?
Didn't Joseph Smith tell his legal wife that he had a revelation - if she did not consent to his polygamy, she would be destroyed ?
Isn't it true that she left him, and then outlived him ? Ultimately, he was destroyed, NOT her.
What does that tell you about Joseph Smith, Honey Dawn ?
His revelation in this regard was false, and this would lead any reasonable person to conclude that the rest of his "revelations" were suspect as well.
Anonymous MD
All of you can be lesbian crab fisherwomen for all I care, it really doesn't matter to me. But as for me and my family, we're gonna try and follow God.
Anonomous MD, it only shows you don't believe in an afterlife.
Hey, (and I'd call you by your handle if you'd just give your self one....)
"Isn't it true that she left him, and then outlived him? Ultimately, he was destroyed, NOT her"
That's pretty good, if it's true. But I don't think it is. Isn't Emma his first wife, and didn't she stick with him through thick and thin?
I think we need Pratt to inform and resolve.
"Isn't it true that she left him, and then outlived him ?"
No, AnonMD, she didn't leave him. She remained with him until his death. Then she refused to move to Utah with Brigham and the others.
"Ultimately, he was destroyed, NOT her."
Very true. AND she remarried too and still wasn't destroyed.
WC,
Joseph Smith's wife may have stayed with him, but she ultimately left the cult, she outlived him, and she was not destroyed, HE WAS.
I do believe in an afterlife, in which people will be judged by a just God.
In that afterlife, I fully expect Joseph Smith to be judged for FABRICATING the Book of Mormon, which has absolutely NO archeological evidence or DNA evidence to support its claims. So if you are interested in "following God," I suggest that you find a body of spiritual literature which has more evidence to support its claims.
Anonymous MD
WC
Are you following God or your little Willie friend?
Look where that got Warren.
OOPSY
Let me follow Joseph Smith, and I'll let you follow your archeologist and geneticist anywhere they want to take you. Go ahead and keep looking for signs and proof of a true religion and God- but I can already tell you that you're wasting your time. Those things are reserved for those after trials of their faith, not the other way around.
WC,
I wouldn't waste my time following the teachings of a convicted felon -
apparently Joseph Smith was a convicted felon guilty of fraud. Maybe you need to do some additional research into the background of the founder of your faith.
http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon430.htm
Keeping Sweet
Well, before I follow JS, I follow Christ who was a convicted felon, convicted traitor, and was executed for it. You guys just never get tired of this stuff, do you?
"Let me follow Joseph Smith, and I'll let you follow your archeologist and geneticist anywhere they want to take you."
Everybody has the right to follow the spiritual path they deem appropriate for them, regardless of how easily it is proven to be a fantasy. I have yet to find a religion that isn't based on a substantial amount of fantasy and requires much closing of the eyes. For me, eyes wide open works best. I'm just not a good liar -- not even to myself.
WC,
Try following Jesus Christ first, not Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith was merely a man convicted of a felony for fraud in NY State, as has been well documented. He also was a known alcoholic and adulterer.
Jesus was tried and executed for a PERCEIVED (not actual) threat to governmental authority, not fraud, which involves dishonesty.
Jesus posed no real threat to governmental authority at all, in fact He instructed His followers to render unto Caesar that which was Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's.
Joseph Smith repetitively showed disregard to the laws of the state of NY, and the US, despite the clear admonition in the New Testament to be obedient to governmental authorities. (See Romans 13 : 1-5.)
There's a big difference between Jesus and Joseph Smith, WC.
Post a Comment